A Nairobi Court Summons Menlo Park
Kenya's High Court ruled in April 2025 that it can hear a case accusing Meta of amplifying hate that fueled ethnic killings during Ethiopia's Tigray war. The decision is a rare instance of an African court claiming jurisdiction over one of the world's largest technology companies.
The ruling
On 3 April 2025, Kenya's High Court in Nairobi ruled that it had jurisdiction to hear a case accusing Meta, the parent company of Facebook, of contributing to ethnic violence in neighbouring Ethiopia, Reuters reported. The plaintiffs allege that Facebook's recommendation systems amplified violent and hateful posts in Ethiopia during the war in the northern Tigray region between 2020 and 2022.
Meta had argued that local courts do not have the power to hear cases against it where it is not registered as a company, according to Reuters. The court rejected that argument. Because the case raises substantial questions of law, it will be referred to the chief justice to appoint an uneven number of judges to hear it, Amnesty International said.
Who brought the case
The case was filed by two Ethiopian nationals, Abrham Meareg and Fisseha Tekle, together with the Katiba Institute, a Kenya-based constitutional research organization, Reuters reported. Meareg says his father, Meareg Amare, a professor at Bahir Dar University in northern Ethiopia, was killed in November 2021 after Facebook posts targeted him as a member of the Tigrayan ethnic group, according to Amnesty International.
The claimants are demanding that Meta create a restitution fund for victims of hate and violence and alter Facebook's algorithm so that it stops promoting such content, Reuters reported. The case seeks two funds totalling about £1.8bn for victims of hate speech carried in ordinary and sponsored Facebook posts, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism reported.
What each side said
“The court here has refused to shy away from determining an important global matter, recognising that homegrown issues must be addressed directly in our courts,” Nora Mbagathi, executive director of the Katiba Institute, said in comments reported by Reuters. Mandi Mudarikwa, head of strategic litigation at Amnesty International, called the decision “a positive step towards holding big tech companies accountable for contributing to human rights abuses,” in a statement.
Meta has previously said it invested heavily in content moderation and removed hateful content from the platform, Reuters reported. Meta's lawyers signalled they would seek to appeal the jurisdiction decision, according to Amnesty International.
Why it matters
The dispute follows a broader pattern in which human-rights bodies have argued that engagement-driven feeds can amplify content that incites violence in places where platforms invest little in moderation. Amnesty International reached that conclusion about Facebook's role before the 2017 atrocities against the Rohingya in Myanmar. The Kenyan ruling is significant because it lets a case testing those claims proceed in an African court, rather than in the United States, where the company is based.